I stopped judging these cases when the Trayvon Martin shooting took place, and I got burned by initially siding with Martin. In light of all the BS the media trumped up in that case to drive ratings and a partisan political agenda, it became clear to me that there's no way for me to know what actually happened. That doesn't mean I won't form opinions based on clear evidence, but they'll be pretty soft opinions.
Having said that, I do have some thoughts on this. Statalyzer is right that Crutcher's past acts are not relevant to the decision to shoot him, and it's highly unlikely that it would be admitted into evidence in the officer's criminal trial or in a civil rights action brought by his family.
texas_ex2000 is seldom wrong, but he's wrong here by equating his criminal history with the officer's hypothetical history of making racist comments because of the purpose of admitting such evidence. If you admit evidence of Crutcher's criminal record, it would be done to prove that he likely acted in conformity with his criminal history. That's not permissible and shouldn't be. We judge how someone behaved based on the evidence related to the incident in question. However, if the prosecutor in the manslaughter case offers the cop's racist statements into evidence, it would be done to prove her motive or intent in firing on Crutcher. That is permissible. (Again, this is hypothetical. I know of no evidence that she had made racist statements.)
Having said that, I'm not rendering judgment in this case or assuming the cop was right or wrong. Nevertheless, I'm very disturbed at the timing of the indictment. There's no way the investigation is already complete, and it reeks of a rush to judgment made in order to prevent rioting such as what's occurring in Charlotte.
I don't know enough about the Charlotte incident to form an opinion, but from what I have heard, it doesn't look good for the shooter. Furthermore, the fact that it's a black cop makes the BLM and terrorists in Charlotte look especially stupid. (The minute you turn violent, you cross the line from the protester to terrorist, because you're serving the same purpose as those who commit acts of terror.) However, even if the officer was white, the infusion of racial politics into these cases is only making matters worse and making it more difficult for both sides to look at them with any sense of objectivity.
Finally, Hillary Clinton's rush to judgment in these cases is a friggin' disgrace. It's one thing for a bunch of crackheads in Charlotte to do that. They have a right to be stupid, and frankly, I'm starting to expect that sort of thing in the current political climate of lunacy. However, a candidate for President, especially one who's claiming to be more measured, mature, unifying, and contemplative in her approach, isn't suppose to be like that. I understand why she's doing it - because she's afraid black voters aren't motivated enough to turn out for her. However, what's needed in times like this is leadership and maturity, not cheap political cowardice.
Every stupid statement Hillary makes, every blatant lie that comes out of her mouth, every hyperbolic piece of propaganda our baldly partisan and intellectually fraudulent media puts out, every embrace of the BLM movement or reinforcement of their ********* narrative that Hillary participates in is a camel on the back of me abandoning the Never Trump position, and the load is getting heavy. I don't want to have to crawl back to
@mchammer and tell him I changed my mind. I don't want to have to admit to Seattle Husker, NJLonghorn, and Hollandtx that I voted for an intellectually weak blowhard rather than sticking to my guns. But those considerations can't drive my decision, and Hillary is making my position very difficult to defend in my own mind. And coincidentally, my absentee ballot showed up in my e-mail box today . . . I'm going to wait before casting it.
Click to expand...